linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 5/5] sched: User Mode Concurency Groups

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 24 Jan 2022 17:44:03 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        bristot@...hat.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, pjt@...gle.com,
        posk@...gle.com, avagin@...gle.com, jannh@...gle.com,
        tdelisle@...terloo.ca, mark.rutland@....com, posk@...k.io
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 5/5] sched: User Mode Concurency Groups

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 03:29:56PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 04:18:46PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Something like this, still yuck though. Also still need to write me a
> > test for this.
> > 

> > --- a/kernel/sched/umcg.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/umcg.c
> > @@ -232,6 +232,8 @@ static int umcg_update_state(struct task
> >  /* Called from syscall enter path and exceptions that can schedule */
> >  void umcg_sys_enter(struct pt_regs *regs, long syscall)
> >  {
> > +	current->umcg_timeout = 0;
> > +
> >  	/* avoid recursion vs our own syscalls */
> >  	if (syscall == __NR_umcg_wait ||
> >  	    syscall == __NR_umcg_ctl)
> > @@ -519,6 +521,7 @@ void umcg_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *
> >  	struct umcg_task __user *self = tsk->umcg_task;
> >  	bool worker = tsk->flags & PF_UMCG_WORKER;
> >  	u32 state;
> > +	int ret;
> >  
> >  	/* avoid recursion vs schedule() */
> >  	if (worker)
> > @@ -554,12 +557,17 @@ void umcg_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *
> >  		umcg_unpin_pages();
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	switch (umcg_wait(0)) {
> > +	ret = umcg_wait(tsk->umcg_timeout);
> 
> Oh how I hate signals... this can get scribbled by a syscall/fault from
> sigcontext :/
> 
> Maybe I can recover the timo argument from the original syscall
> pt_regs.. let me try.

Urgh, recursive hell... If the signal does *anything* that tickles
notify-resume it'll find RUNNABLE and go wait there --- ad infinitum.

I need to go cook dinner, I'll prod more at this later